| Date: | 02/25/1981 |
|---|---|
| Organization: | State Ethics Commission |
A member of the general court may appear on behalf of a private client before a state agency since the proceedings are quasi-judicial.
- This page, EC-COI-81-31 , is offered by
- State Ethics Commission
Opinion
Opinion EC-COI-81-31
Table of Contents
Facts
You are a recently elected member of the General Court. You also maintain a private law practice.
Question
You ask whether the state Conflict of Interest Law, Chapter 268A, prohibits you from appearing for compensation in a formal real estate tax abatement proceeding before the state Appellate Tax Board.
Answer
The Commission concludes that it does not.
Discussion
In rendering this opinion, the Commission has relied upon the facts as you have stated them and has not conducted any independent investigation of those facts.
The appeal to the Board involves a claim of overvaluation of a piece of property by the (town) Board of Assessors. It has been proceeding for two years and will soon go before the Board. The Board has appellate jurisdiction over local tax assessments, (see G.L. c. 58A, s.6 and c. 59, s.65) and is authorized to conduct formal or informal proceedings.
As a member of the General Court, you are subject to the Conflict-of-interest Law. Section 4 of that statute places restrictions on your activities in representing interests other than those of the state where the state is a party or has a direct and substantial interest. The fifth paragraph of that section exempts members of the General Court from sections 4(a) and 4(c) but prohibits appearance by a member of the General Court" for any compensation other than his legislative salary before any state agency unless, 1) the particular matter is ministerial (e.g., filing or amendment of: tax returns, applications for licenses, incorporation papers); 2) the appearance is before a court of the commonwealth; or 3) the appearance is in a quasi-judicial proceeding. A quasi-judicial proceeding is one where the action of the state agency is adjudicatory in nature, that action is appealable to the courts, and both sides are entitled to representation by counsel provided that such counsel can be neither the Attorney General nor the counsel for the state agency conducting the proceeding. G.L. c; 268A, s.4, para. 6.
The proceeding before the Board is intended to adjudicate disputed facts in a particular case and involves adjudication of those facts as related to certain individuals. These qualities establish the formal appeal as an adjudicatory proceeding. United States v. Florida East Coast Railway Co., 410 U.S. 224, 93 S. Ct. 810 (1973). The Board's decision is appealable to the Supreme Judicial Court. G.L. c. 58A, s.13.
Finally, Rule 1 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Appellate Tax Board provides that a party may be represented by an attorney and, since the parties in this appeal are your client and the (town) Board of Assessors, neither party will be represented by the Attorney General or counsel for the Board.
Decision
Therefore, this formal appeal to the Board is a quasi-judicial proceeding thereby qualifying you for exemption from the provisions of section 4(a)and 4(c).
End Of Decision